Wednesday, October 14, 2015

The First Democratic Debate of the 2016 Election

The first Democratic debate existed in Las Vegas, Nevada inside of the Wyn Hotel. Anderson Cooper was the moderator. The debate involved Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Martin O’Malley, Jim Webb, and Lincoln Chaffe. The candidates acted prepared. Hillary Clinton wanted to act surgical in her responses. She acted calm. Bernie Sanders came prepared too and was shouting on many occasions throughout the debate. Sanders wanted to focus on income inequality while Clinton wanted to present herself as a progressive who is pragmatic. One of the big moments was when Cooper asked Bernie Sanders is he was a socialist or not. Bernie Sanders expressed a nuisance answer. He said that he is opposed to casino capitalism and that he is a democratic socialist (on previous occasions. He wants to mimic the modest social welfare actions done in Scandinavia). Clinton wanted to save capitalism, but capitalism by its nature promotes inequality and poverty. Also, Anderson Cooper (who once worked at the CIA when he was 19 years old, which is admitted) failed to see that many socialists and other progressive activists fought capitalist extremists in order to get Social Security, a higher minimum wage, workplace standards, and other regulations that tons of people benefit from. Many unions fought for workers' rights. Anderson ignored how capitalists were involved in the Maafa centuries ago. Both Clinton and Sanders want more entrepreneurship. The candidates said that they sympathize with the middle class, black people, immigrants, etc. We know that the Republican Party readily uses right wing demagogy to appeal to religious bigotry, racism, anti-immigrant prejudice, sexism, etc. (and they are funded by the financial elite. Many GOP members are rather clear that they want the elimination of social welfare programs, deregulation of business, tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, etc.). Likewise, the Democrats use populist rhetoric, but many of their policies in the establishment have promoted neoliberalism domestically and imperialism overseas for a long time. Many people want independent solutions. That is why many people know about the crisis of American capitalism. All of the candidates talked about war, poverty, injustice, and the domination of politics by big money, but they refused in the debate to expose how the profit system connect all of these evils together (while the working class and the poor suffer via the actions of the 1 percent). They refused to say in that debate that the money used in drones and militarist policies are stripping away the resources needed to rebuilt our cities, towns, and rural communities.

Hillary Clinton said that she wants regulators to control the actions of the banks, but she has received the most funding by Wall Street banks than any other Democratic candidate. Also, her husband was responsible for the elimination of Glass Steagall, which eliminated many regulations on large corporate banks. This is why O'Malley said that he wanted the re-institution of Glass Steagall. We have a society where 1 percent owns nearly half of all wealth in America and they want more. Sanders have talked about the bad Supreme Court decision of Citizens United, which contributed to more corporate influences on political elections. This is not just. She said that she is a “progressive who wants to get things done.” This was, rhetorically at least, a different posture from the campaign of her husband in 1992, in which he ran as a “New Democrat” who rejected liberalism and promised to “end welfare as we know it.” The debate dealt heavily with foreign policy. All of the candidates believe in some form or another of war mongering. They differed on the degrees on which to enact militarism. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders agreed that they don't want to focus on the emails and they shook hands. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders agreed with the imperial policies of the Obama administration on Syria. They want the Gulf States (who funded ISIS directly and indirectly) to be used to fight ISIS in Syria. Hillary Clinton wanted an U.S. impose no fly zone over parts of Syria on the table. That policy will cause confusion and more chaos in the region. Asked directly when a “President Sanders” would use force, the senator replied, “When our country is threatened and when our allies are threatened.” He is not a pacifist, he continued, and had supported Bill Clinton’s bombing of Serbia in 1999, the invasion of Afghanistan under George W. Bush in 2001, and the current Obama campaign of air strikes in Syria. That is not anti-war at all. The candidates didn’t talk about how there is a link between the concentration of wealth and privilege at the top of economic power to the U.S. military aggression overseas. All of the candidates talked about the Black Lives Matter movement. Many candidates talked about how Black Lives Matter or how every life matters (which was said by Jim Webb, which was disappointing since we have an emergency in the black community with police terrorism, etc. Jim Webb need to realize that we have an epidemic of cops killing black people in this country). O’Malley showed the most progressive views on immigration. He said that we must treat immigrants fairly. O'Malley had his moments too. He has to deal with his record as mayor (which is about zero tolerance and aggressive policies) and his new statements about economic justice. O'Malley wants to present himself as a more progressive person. Each of the candidates followed differing versions of restrictions of gun rights under certain circumstances. Webb sounded like a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican. Chaffee explained his views on civil liberties and on other issues. By and large, the debate focused mostly on Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders including O'Malley, Chafee, and Webb. By and large, the debate was interesting. The whole debate represented how the country changed from even 4 years ago. There is the growth of populism in America.

There are many points to be mentioned. Back during her childhood, Nicki Minaj didn’t look like this neither has her family looked like this. Also, many celebrities have had injections on their gluteus maximus for years. A fictional portrayal of Nicki Minaj and her kin folks are shown in this “parody.” Showing dogs, parents, etc. with an exaggerated anatomy is weird. Her relatives never had such injections in their bodies during her childhood or now. A dog used in that fashion gives me an uneasy vibe about the skit. A little girl being used like that is inappropriate. Nothing in mainstream TV happens by happenstance. Parodies like these happen for a reason. We all know the reason. So, Nicki Mainj is an intelligent black woman. She made mistakes like all people have made mistakes. Some folks act like Nicki deserves to be called every name under the sun. In my spirit, I feel a certain type of way. Historically, many black physical features were mocked. Saartjie Baartman comes to mind. Now, this skit is not equivalent to the mistreatment of Saartjie Baartman (I want to make that clear), but the mocking of the physical appearances (or the surgeries done on black people) of black people is not new. There are differing views on the skit. I respect people who have a diversity of views on this issue. I just trust my intuition. I feel weird in my intuition about the stereotypical “parody.” Tarantino said that he has the right to say the N word randomly. I don’t agree. He's arrogant and black people have every right to not co-sign him. Blacks shouldn't be made to be mental slaves for that director. Black people have the right to have free, independent thinking about ourselves and about the world in general. People have the right to critique his films. There is no ambiguity about him. Either people respect him or they don’t. He has used his privilege in order to push his slick, nefarious agendas. His casual usage of the N word in his personal time, his sadistic usage of themes in film, and his other actions are things that I don’t agree with.

The images of the Confederate traitors and extremists on Stone Mountain is disturbing to put it lightly. Some people want the Dr. King monument would be in a different location and others don’t. I don’t believe in destroying history, but I don’t believe in glamorizing the disgraceful, racist, and evil history of the Confederacy either. If the monument of Dr. King was placed on Stone Mountain while the images of the 3 Confederate rebels were gone from Stone Mountain, then that would be great. Since Georgia has a huge amount of neo-Confederates, the relief of those 3 Confederates will most probably remain. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a follower of nonviolence and he was a pacifist clergyman who also stood up for economic justice. He opposed the Vietnam War heroically and he wanted radical social change to address poverty. He was against militarism and he preached a revolution of values where society will focus more on people than things. His last campaign was when he promoted labor rights for Memphis sanitation workers. Dr. King wanted workers to have living wages, dignity, respect, and human rights. The Dr. King of 1968 was much more radical and much more progressive than the Dr King of 1955. In less than 3 years from now will be the 50th anniversary of his passing. We not only respect what Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stood for. We are inspired to carry on the work that he promoted while he was living on this Earth. If someone tries to get illegal injections, that person is playing with fire literally. She or Cruz-Dilworth injecting other women in a dangerous fashion is wrong as well. She certainly needs counseling. I can’t co-sign her injecting substances like “Krazy Glue” in women when she is not a licensed professional. Not to mention that using Krazy Glue in such surgeries is morally wrong too. There are many people who lack Self-Love in their lives. Beauty is found in skinny people, plus sized people, and everyone in between. We have to teach these young‘ins (and others) that beauty is never monolithic and it’s diverse. A person's physical appearance doesn’t determine whether someone is superior or inferior. Regardless of our outward appearances, we should value people in a progressive, fair, and humane fashion. Cruz-Dilworth’s story is a lesson and a warning about how dangerous, illegal surgeries are not worth it. At the end of the day, we have one life to live and we want human beings to be treated as human beings (not as commodities and not as objects). The materialism and the superficiality found in many aspects of society must be called out. Beauty is not just found in the body. It is found in the soul, in human compassion, in Love, and in wisdom.

We have seen this story all too often. The Cleveland Police Department has disrespected the family of Tamir Rice. This time is no exception. Loehmann was the officer who killed Tamir Rice. Loehmann has a known history of mental instability and he was rejected when he applied for work at other police departments. Then, he was hired by the CPD. He should have never been a cop in Cleveland at all. When the daughter of the mother of Tamir Rice tried to come to her brother, the cops tackled her, and tossed her into a patrol car. Some of these cops have absolutely no respect for black human lives. This incident is one example of a serious problem of misconduct and the total disregard of human life by many police officers. Tamir Rice was murdered in less than 3 seconds. Rice was not a direct threat to anyone. It is important to note that both officers never gave Tamir Rice first aid after he was shot. Only one FBI agent did first. The police said that Rice was seated at a table with other people. The video showed that Rice was alone. The video showed that Rice was shot almost immediately after Loehmann exited the vehicle. The video showed that Rice did not pull out the toy gun. In the video, Rice is using both hands to hold his shirt up and expose the pellet gun to view just before he falls to the ground. Tamir Rice absolutely did not pull the air gun out of his waistband and brandish it in any way. The DOJ has documented the problem of police corruption in Cleveland. The murder of a child is truly wrong. We should never stand for this. This incident has nothing to do with intraracial crime. This incident has nothing to do with black families. This incident has everything to do with the mentality of many cops who want to shoot first and ask questions later. This whole circumstance is how crooked cops could care less about truth and justice. The police unions who has expressed unconditional support for any officer should be ashamed of themselves. The character assassination of a little boy is truly heinous. We are in solidarity with the family of Tamir Rice.
RIP Tamir Rice.
#Black Lives Matter.

By Timothy

No comments: